davidbreyer / namebench

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/namebench
Apache License 2.0
0 stars 0 forks source link

Primary DNS is compared against itself #234

Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 8 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
What steps will reproduce the problem?

1.  Prior to running test, set Primary DNS as 205.152.37.23 
dns.asm.bellsouth.net # [ North Druid Hills, GA ] in network connections

2.  Run namebench test without specifying the primary DNS for special testing.

3.  View test results summary output from namebench.  

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?

I did not expect to see my primary DNS server compared against itself.  Nor did 
I expect to see my primary DNS server listed at all because the whole summary 
is made in comparison to primary DNS.  What I saw instead was the primary DNS 
server listed as -33.6 % different from itself.  This indicates a problem 
somewhere.

What version of the product are you using? On what operating system?

I am using namebench 1.3.1 with the following system:

# [ Operating System:   Linux 3.5.0-28-generic (32-bit), Ubuntu 12.04 LTS  ]

# [ Browser:        Firefox 20.0, Mozilla Firefox for Ubuntu, canonical-1.0 ]
# [ Browser:        Mozilla 5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:20.0) Gecko/20100101 ]
#

Please provide any additional information below.

This is my second observance of this error with the same primary DNS server.  I 
have run about 20 namebench tests so far since 2013-04-20 and I am just 
beginning to see this issue.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by raleigh....@gmail.com on 5 May 2013 at 11:01

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
I did not use the same primary DNS server in all of the namebench tests, so 
there were many tests where the problem could not have repeated with the DNS in 
North Druid Hills, GA.

Original comment by raleigh....@gmail.com on 5 May 2013 at 11:08

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Could you include some output?  What are the two versions called in the output?

Original comment by digitalbitstream@gmail.com on 19 Jul 2013 at 3:52